Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If marriage has nothing to do with religion then just use the term, "civil union". But that's not good enough for gay people. That's what it is, right? Oh, but there is significance to the word, marriage, you might say. That's because it has a religious foundation.
Well considering that the state and federal governments have laws and benefits that go with a civil MARRIAGE, and the federal government does not recognize any civil union, no thanks, I will call my marriage a marriage and get a civil marriage license.
Actually I have no problem with things like polygamy and polyandry. Though they are different than a civil marriage between two people because it involves multiple people. There would have to be a clause to address that issue.
So, why do you think it is acceptable to deny same-sex marriage? And try not to say things like it is about having children or anything like that because those excuses you use aren't barrings for two people to get married.
OK, so we now support polyandry and polygamy along with same-sex.
Thank you for the clarification.
The other form of non-traditional marriage in question is marriages between close relatives.
I'm sure you just forgot to comment of these potential marriage arrangements.
Should a brother and sister be married by the state?
How about a brother and a brother or a sister and a sister?
When challenged laws that prohibit activity, such as same sex marriage, do have to show the activity causes harm. So the real question is, how does allowing those two men to marry cause harm?
So by your frazzled logic, what harm is there in a man marrying his dog, or his car? The answer is that it causes no harm at all, so why don't we endorse it then? Guess we have to allow it then, and allow any other version of marriage, since we passed your test, and the state cannot demonstrate any 'harm.'
Your problem is your do not understand why the people asked government to endorse marriage and create this framework of laws to protect it, in the first place.
So by your frazzled logic, what harm is there in a man marrying his dog, or his car? The answer is that it causes no harm at all, so why don't we endorse it then? Guess we have to allow it then, and allow any other version of marriage, since we passed your test, and the state cannot demonstrate any 'harm.'
Your problem is your do not understand why the people asked government to endorse marriage and create this framework of laws to protect it, in the first place.
A dog or a car can't enter into a contract with another party, stop being ridiculous.
Why do you consider three random women you don't know ***holes? Seems a bit harsh. Also 50% of heterosexual marriages end in divorce, so you can also say the same thing about those marriages too.
They are making a mockery of what gays have been fighting for, recognition of same-sex marriage. They are a--holes.
So people you don't know getting married somehow effects your life? I don't follow you here. When my wife and I got married, did that somehow have an effect on you?
Well a single gay couple caused a Christian business owner to lose their business. I better not start a wedding business.
This whole notion that gay ppl just simply want to get married and live their lives with no affect on society is not realistic. Nationwide legalization of gay marriage will bring on a drastic society or cultural shift. And what's next? Look to Canada. Gay ppl are now suing pastors who won't marry them. Religious freedom is thrown out the window. It can happen here too.
Well a single gay couple caused a Christian business owner to lose their business. I better not start a wedding business.
This whole notion that gay ppl just simply want to get married and live their lives with no affect on society is not realistic. Nationwide legalization of gay marriage will bring on a drastic society or cultural shift. And what's next? Look to Canada. Gay ppl are now suing pastors who won't marry them. Religious freedom is thrown out the window. It can happen here too.
You're saying Christians would have to treat gay people like they would any other person? Not in my America.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
